G.R. No. 105391 February 28, 1994
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BENEDICTO CAMPA, MATEO CAMPA, PROCESO CAMPA, JIMMY CAMPA, and DALMACIO CAMPA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On the evening of January 24, 1984, a dance party was held at the home of Benedicto Campa, Sr. in Bacolod City to celebrate his daughter’s birthday. Josefino Jagocoy, along with his friends Freddie Mojica, Ricardo Pagunsan, Jr., Jessie Parcon, and Noli Malayang, attended. At around 10:00 PM, Josefino asked Mila (Indang), the wife of Dalmacio Campa, to dance. She refused, stating she was married, but Josefino allegedly tried to pull her towards the dance area. Mila, feeling outraged, went screaming to Benedicto Campa’s house. About five minutes later, a person identified as Jun Aspan jumped from the house, pursued by the Campa brothers (Benedicto, Mateo, Proceso, Jimmy, and Dalmacio) and Jeorge Villacampa. The pursuers returned shortly and, without warning, attacked Josefino Jagocoy, who was leaning on a bamboo pole. Jeorge Villacampa hacked Josefino with a cane cutter, causing him to fall. While on the ground, Dalmacio Campa stabbed him twice in the abdomen with a double-bladed copper knife, and Jimmy Campa also stabbed him with a stainless steel knife. The other Campa brothers surrounded Josefino and struck him with cane cutters. When Freddie Mojica cried out to stop the attack, he was also assaulted, hit on the forehead and arm by Benedicto Campa, Jr., causing him to flee. Josefino was taken to the hospital, where he identified his attackers to a police investigator before dying the next day. The accused were charged with murder. The defense presented a different version, claiming only Jeorge Villacampa attacked Josefino after an argument, and that the Campa brothers were inside the house during the incident, only coming out afterward. The trial court found the accused guilty of murder.

ISSUE

The main issues raised by the appellants were: (1) the credibility of prosecution witness Freddie Mojica; (2) the alleged inconsistency between the medical certificate and witness testimony on the number of wounds; (3) the lack of evidence for the qualifying circumstance of evident premeditation; (4) whether the mitigating circumstances of passion/obfuscation and voluntary surrender should be appreciated.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision. It found the testimony of Freddie Mojica credible and corroborated by another witness, Ricardo Pagunsan, Jr. The medical certificate’s listing of four wounds did not negate the witnesses’ accounts, as it only detailed fatal wounds. The Court agreed with the appellants that evident premeditation was not proven, as there was no evidence of prior planning. The circumstance of abuse of superior strength was present, qualifying the killing to murder. However, the Court held that the killing was not attended by treachery, as the attack was frontal and the victim was not utterly defenseless. The claim of passion/obfuscation was rejected, as the stoning of the Campa house occurred after the killing. Voluntary surrender was not appreciated, as the appellants were arrested. Consequently, the Court found the appellants guilty of homicide, not murder, attended by the generic aggravating circumstance of advantage of superior strength. They were sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of eleven (11) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to nineteen (19) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and ordered to indemnify the heirs of Josefino Jagocoy in the sum of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) solidarily.